A federal judge has shot down one of the primary legal arguments that College of DuPage trustees used to justify firing embattled President Robert Breuder.

Trustees declared Breuder's contract void in September 2015 based on the theory that his first extension was approved in April 2009 – four months after he began – by a lame-duck board that knew it was handcuffing incoming trustees with a long-term contract. The trustees insisted that boards in Illinois cannot legally bind future boards to lengthy employment agreements and based that argument on 19th-century case law.

Without a valid contract, trustees said they were no longer obligated to award Breuder the $763,000 severance package that a prior board had promised in exchange for retiring in March 2016, three years early.

The board later fired Breuder and listed eight reasons for the decision, including excessive spending, poor financial oversight and failing to respond to requests made under the state's open records laws. He filed a wrongful termination lawsuit the next day, alleging breach of contract, defamation and violation of Breuder's due process rights.

In refusing to dismiss many of Breuder's claims, U.S. District Court Judge Andrea Wood rejected the college's argument that boards cannot handcuff future boards to lengthy contracts. The case law used to justify the COD board's actions has been overridden by current Illinois state law, she said.

"The power of community college boards to establish tenure and dismissal policies for administrative personnel remains broad — and, most relevantly, includes the power of a community college board to make contracts with such personnel that go beyond its term," Wood wrote in a ruling issued Friday.

As is typical at this stage in the litigation, Wood did not render an opinion on the board's other reasons for firing Breuder.

She did, however, rule that prior boards did not violate the state's Open Meetings Act when trustees decided in secret to extend the employment contract of the school's controversial president. That contradicts a finding by DuPage County State's Attorney Robert Berlin, who last year determined that the board broke the law in 2014 when it voted by hand, outside of public view, to extend Breuder's contract an additional year, taking it to 2019.

Berlin did not find that the illegal vote invalidated Breuder's contract.

It's unclear how Wood's ruling will affect the lawsuit, which some trustees previously have signaled they would be open to settling. Breuder is suing four current and former trustees as individuals, as well.

"We are pleased that the Court dismissed several of Dr. Breuder's claims with prejudice," college spokesman Joseph Moore said in a statement. "As to the remaining claims, the college's policy remains not to comment on ongoing litigation."

Breuder's attorney Melissa Eubanks said the ruling makes clear that former college Chairwoman Katharine Hamilton and the three other members of the board majority - known as the Clean Slate - had no legal basis for firing Breuder.

"The Court’s decision highlights that Kathy Hamilton and her Clean Slate Trustees acted foolishly and recklessly in their unjust plight to terminate Dr. Breuder’s employment with COD," Eubanks said in a statement. "These wrongful actions have resulted in significant costs to COD and the DuPage County taxpayers and we hope that this ruling shows that such costs could have been avoided had Mrs. Hamilton and her Clean Slate Trustees acted according to the terms of Dr. Breuder’s employment contract and the law."

Trustee Dianne McGuire, who opposed voiding the contract and firing Breuder, warned the board in 2015 that it would face an expensive legal challenge if it attempted to void the contract. After Friday's ruling, she accused the board majority of recklessly exposing the college to the litigation.

"A contract is a contract, and most folks understand the importance of that concept," she said.